Thoughts on Stanford over H/Y? Forum

[Casey2889]

I'd like to first clerk in CA, then work in and out of CA biglaw as I build credentials and experience for a political career in CA. Working as an Asst. US Attorney is also on my radar. SLS seems like the obvious choice, right? I shouldn't bolt for H or Y were I to get in?

This is clearly somewhat hypothetical, but I'm curious to know the general opinion.

[Knock]

I'd like to first clerk in CA, then work in and out of CA biglaw as I build credentials and experience for a political career in CA. Working as an Asst. US Attorney is also on my radar. SLS seems like the obvious choice, right? I shouldn't bolt for H or Y were I to get in?

This is clearly somewhat hypothetical, but I'm curious to know the general opinion.

Anyone of them will probably get you where you want to be and none of them would be a bad decision. For working in California, i'd say Y>S>H, but again, there's really no wrong decision here.

[JazzOne]

I'd like to first clerk in CA, then work in and out of CA biglaw as I build credentials and experience for a political career in CA. Working as an Asst. US Attorney is also on my radar. SLS seems like the obvious choice, right? I shouldn't bolt for H or Y were I to get in?

This is clearly somewhat hypothetical, but I'm curious to know the general opinion.

Anyone of them will probably get you where you want to be and none of them would be a bad decision. For working in California, i'd say Y>S>H, but again, there's really no wrong decision here.

+1

If I wanted to work in Cali, I would rank them Y>S>H.

[Casey2889]

just to pry some justificatory arguments: i agree that H's size places it third, but what makes Yale better than Stanford? despite my flirtations with academia, i dont think i want to be a legal academic, nor, for that matter, do i want to clerk for SCOTUS....besides a leg up in launching legal scholars, what has Yale traditionally offered that merits a consistently elevated position?

i'm really interested to hear what people think about this.

[JazzOne]

just to pry some justificatory arguments: i agree that H's size places it third, but what makes Yale better than Stanford? despite my flirtations with academia, i dont think i want to be a legal academic, nor, for that matter, do i want to clerk for SCOTUS....besides a leg up in launching legal scholars, what has Yale traditionally offered that merits a consistently elevated position?

i'm really interested to hear what people think about this.

For me it would be purely about the prestige and selectivity. I'm not a prestige whore by any means. I chose a full ride at UT over T14. But at a certain point, there's enough prestige at stake to stroke my ego. Yale has both lay prestige and incredible respect in the field, and it's one of the stronger Ivies overall. Plus, their admissions are so ridiculously selective. I read a post a while back that said, "If you get accepted to Yale, you go to prove you got accepted." That's kind of how I feel about it. Call me elitist, but everyone has his price.

[Casey2889]

just to pry some justificatory arguments: i agree that H's size places it third, but what makes Yale better than Stanford? despite my flirtations with academia, i dont think i want to be a legal academic, nor, for that matter, do i want to clerk for SCOTUS....besides a leg up in launching legal scholars, what has Yale traditionally offered that merits a consistently elevated position?

i'm really interested to hear what people think about this.

For me it would be purely about the prestige and selectivity. I'm not a prestige whore by any means. I chose a full ride at UT over T14. But at a certain point, there's enough prestige at stake to stroke my ego. Yale has both lay prestige and incredible respect in the field, and it's one of the stronger Ivies overall. Plus, their admissions are so ridiculously selective. I read a post a while back that said, "If you get accepted to Yale, you go to prove you got accepted." That's kind of how I feel about it. Call me elitist, but everyone has his price.

i already have a great ivy UG on my resume so i dont think i need to prove myself a 2nd time. i think that line says it all though: "you go to yale to prove you got accepted."

[Zatarra]

I'm wrestling with the same decision (though just S v H), though I'm not sure I want to work in CA long term (most of my family is on the East Coast, with connections to NYC, so Columbia w/ Butler is in the running, but without a Hamilton, not sure that's enough to dump S or H).

My interests are all over the map, but tend more toward public interest, civil rights, and government, so I'm really looking for the best choice in terms of flexibility. If I were to do anything like Big Law, I'd probably want to focus on international law (preferably Asia), for what it's worth. I've little interest in LA, but could see myself in SF for at least a few years, but imagine at some point I'd wind up back on the East Coast. Decisions, decisions!

[dr123]

mm

[rundoxierun]

I wouldnt even question you if you did it.

[Casey2889]

wtf does working in and out of biglaw mean? Im not sure but I think you have to either work in biglaw or not

nope, its not uncommon for attorneys to start off at a big firm, leave pre-partner for a government job (i.e. to become an AUSA for a a few years), then leave that to take a job as a partner at another (though usually smaller) firm, then return to government work. for examples, look at the current US Attorney for the Northern Dist of CA (or any US Attny really), or fmr. Sec State Warren Christopher.

[TigerBeer]

just to pry some justificatory arguments: i agree that H's size places it third, but what makes Yale better than Stanford? despite my flirtations with academia, i dont think i want to be a legal academic, nor, for that matter, do i want to clerk for SCOTUS....besides a leg up in launching legal scholars, what has Yale traditionally offered that merits a consistently elevated position?

i'm really interested to hear what people think about this.

For me it would be purely about the prestige and selectivity. I'm not a prestige whore by any means. I chose a full ride at UT over T14. But at a certain point, there's enough prestige at stake to stroke my ego. Yale has both lay prestige and incredible respect in the field, and it's one of the stronger Ivies overall. Plus, their admissions are so ridiculously selective. I read a post a while back that said, "If you get accepted to Yale, you go to prove you got accepted." That's kind of how I feel about it. Call me elitist, but everyone has his price.

just a minor point: within california i think stanford actually has more lay prestige than yale. at the very least they should be equal. californians tend to be a bit ignorant of schools outside california for various reasons

either way lay prestige should be only a tiny consideration

[notanumber]

just to pry some justificatory arguments: i agree that H's size places it third, but what makes Yale better than Stanford? despite my flirtations with academia, i dont think i want to be a legal academic, nor, for that matter, do i want to clerk for SCOTUS....besides a leg up in launching legal scholars, what has Yale traditionally offered that merits a consistently elevated position?

i'm really interested to hear what people think about this.

For me it would be purely about the prestige and selectivity. I'm not a prestige whore by any means. I chose a full ride at UT over T14. But at a certain point, there's enough prestige at stake to stroke my ego. Yale has both lay prestige and incredible respect in the field, and it's one of the stronger Ivies overall. Plus, their admissions are so ridiculously selective. I read a post a while back that said, "If you get accepted to Yale, you go to prove you got accepted." That's kind of how I feel about it. Call me elitist, but everyone has his price.

Regarding Biglaw, about 40% of Stanford's graduating class ends up in California. The percentage for Yale is probably much lower. That difference will likely help when it comes to competing for the super-desirable jobs.

Regarding politics, Stanford will help with networking and volunteering on campaigns, but YLS (and HLS, for that matter) have some interesting connections to SF politics (HLS grads essentially control the BoS). I know nothing about LA politics except that folk from down there seem to rarely win statewide elections. Regardless, if you work out in CA during the summers then you can start making the necessary connections.

[The Stig]

interesting thread... what actually matters more: having more alumni in an area (SLS grads in CA) so a stronger network (but heavier competition from your classmates) or having a more prestigious/smaller placement in CA (YLS grads in CA) so a weaker network (but stronger name, less competition from your classmates)?

[vanwinkle]

For me it would be purely about the prestige and selectivity. I'm not a prestige whore by any means. I chose a full ride at UT over T14.

To be honest, in Texas for both politics and the business/legal world, you're probably better off going to UT than most of the T14 anyway. It's the local heavyweight in terms of prestige and gives you those local ties that matter so much because of how insular Texas is.

[Casey2889]

For me it would be purely about the prestige and selectivity. I'm not a prestige whore by any means. I chose a full ride at UT over T14.

To be honest, in Texas for both politics and the business/legal world, you're probably better off going to UT than most of the T14 anyway. It's the local heavyweight in terms of prestige and gives you those local ties that matter so much because of how insular Texas is.

(1) true maybe for texas, but i dont think that, for example, Berkeley or UCLA is a bigger heavyweight than Stanford anywhere in CA.

(2) agree with earlier comment that qualitative differences b/w HYS is probably marginal in terms of immediate outcomes, and that only "real" differences are those that might arise from comparative (and minimally important) lay perspectives.

(3) good point re: "40% of SLS stay in CA." i figure you make a lot of friends (not just "connections") in law school, and the fact that, at SLS, many of these friends would be likely to stick around CA would probably be a huge bonus/support group to someone looking to build a campaign team....(hopefully not everyone is a soulless gunner)....

[Fark-o-vision]

For me it would be purely about the prestige and selectivity. I'm not a prestige whore by any means. I chose a full ride at UT over T14.

To be honest, in Texas for both politics and the business/legal world, you're probably better off going to UT than most of the T14 anyway. It's the local heavyweight in terms of prestige and gives you those local ties that matter so much because of how insular Texas is.

(1) true maybe for texas, but i dont think that, for example, Berkeley or UCLA is a bigger heavyweight than Stanford anywhere in CA.

(2) agree with earlier comment that qualitative differences b/w HYS is probably marginal in terms of immediate outcomes, and that only "real" differences are those that might arise from comparative (and minimally important) lay perspectives.

(3) good point re: "40% of SLS stay in CA." i figure you make a lot of friends (not just "connections") in law school, and the fact that, at SLS, many of these friends would be likely to stick around CA would probably be a huge bonus/support group to someone looking to build a campaign team....(hopefully not everyone is a soulless gunner)....

I think you go Yale just because of options. Also, I've heard the "double Ivy" can be an fairly large advantage, but that an Ivy undergrad is not, in itself, going to really impress the legal community.

Guy One:

[Casey2889]

[quote= an Ivy undergrad is not, in itself, going to really impress the legal community.[/quote]

so you're saying ivy-ivy = impressive, but ivy-SLS = not impressive? that's just BS.

[vanwinkle]

(1) true maybe for texas, but i dont think that, for example, Berkeley or UCLA is a bigger heavyweight than Stanford anywhere in CA.

I was only speaking of Texas and its unique circumstances, but aside from that, your response is flawed anyway. UT is the undisputed best law school in Texas (in terms of prestige, placement, and alumni networks) and recognized as such, and that's why it's such a local heavyweight. Stanford is the best law school in CA, it is recognized as such, and it produces a number of grads who love to stay in CA, so of course people don't regard Berkeley or UCLA as bigger local heavyweights. They're not analogous to UT at all.

[vanwinkle]

so you're saying ivy-ivy = impressive, but ivy-SLS = not impressive? that's just BS.

Actually, given what I have heard and observed about the relevance of "double Ivy", I do suspect that Ivy-H and Ivy-Y probably are truly stronger than Ivy-S in the eyes of at least some employers (or at least in the eyes of some individuals who get to make hiring decisions).

[notanumber]

For me it would be purely about the prestige and selectivity. I'm not a prestige whore by any means. I chose a full ride at UT over T14.

To be honest, in Texas for both politics and the business/legal world, you're probably better off going to UT than most of the T14 anyway. It's the local heavyweight in terms of prestige and gives you those local ties that matter so much because of how insular Texas is.

(1) true maybe for texas, but i dont think that, for example, Berkeley or UCLA is a bigger heavyweight than Stanford anywhere in CA.

(2) agree with earlier comment that qualitative differences b/w HYS is probably marginal in terms of immediate outcomes, and that only "real" differences are those that might arise from comparative (and minimally important) lay perspectives.

(3) good point re: "40% of SLS stay in CA." i figure you make a lot of friends (not just "connections") in law school, and the fact that, at SLS, many of these friends would be likely to stick around CA would probably be a huge bonus/support group to someone looking to build a campaign team....(hopefully not everyone is a soulless gunner)....

Have you worked in CA politics before? Because I don't think this will really make much of a difference. The last big campaign I worked for here included more people from Yale and Harvard (including candidates) than from Stanford. In fact, I don't know of any Stanford grads who were major players on either side. Far more important will be the political causes and organizations you support and articulate with after you finish law school. SLS will give you an advantage in this regard if you intend to stay in the Bay Area, but I imagine that totally vanishes if you're moving to anther part of the state.

[r6_philly]

so you're saying ivy-ivy = impressive, but ivy-SLS = not impressive? that's just BS.

Actually, given what I have heard and observed about the relevance of "double Ivy", I do suspect that Ivy-H and Ivy-Y probably are truly stronger than Ivy-S in the eyes of at least some employers (or at least in the eyes of some individuals who get to make hiring decisions).

This is definitely true in Ivy country, but is it true in CA?

[vanwinkle]

This is definitely true in Ivy country, but is it true in CA?

That's something I honestly have no clue on. I would guess it depends on whether the person in CA you're interviewing with is a double Ivy or not.

[BruceWayne]

Since you want to be an AUSA, that means that you really want either a fed district clerkship or a Circuit Court of Appeals clerkship in the district/circuit you plan on being an AUSA in. This will give you a HUGE advantage in becoming an AUSA in whatever district it is that interests you. As such you should go to Yale if you have the option. Yale is the only school where you can go in expecting to get a federal clerkship. There's a huge chance that you would not get a federal clerkship in California from Stanford or Harvard.

[abl]

For public interest, S has a slight advantage over H (better LRAP, more involved students, better support services, etc, etc). For clerkships, it's actually pretty even if you look at the most recent couple years for Y and S (which both are in front of H in terms of percent of the class, but obviously lag in absolute numbers). S is the undisputed king of CA for virtually everything--including clerkships, so there's a small boost there, even as compared to Y. The only real difference professionally that I could put my finger on is that your shot of making LR at Y and S is relatively better than at H (same # of people on LR, fewer people to try out), yet the weight of being on YLJ or SLR is virtually the same as HLR.

All of that said, these differences are incredibly minor, and as this post demonstrates, reasonable people can differ on them. Rather than making your decision based on whether you trust my word more or one of the other poster's word more (or whoever you end up talking to in the real world about this), you should go where you feel you "fit" the best. How you do at S or Y or H is going to have a much bigger impact on your career than whether you go to S or Y or H, and each school has its own fairly unique feel. H is probably marginally worse for what you want to do than Y which is probably marginally worse than S, but if H is the perfect fit and you end up with half Hs and President of a student group instead of 1/3 and Secretary, that's going to count for MUCH more than the very slight differences between the schools.

Your experience going to H Y or S will be pretty notably different, and THAT is what you should be primarily thinking about. S has clinics that you do full time (a pretty unique program with significant advantages and disadvantages), and really pushes (and makes it easy to do) dual degrees. S and Y both place a premium on life experience, so the average student is going to be a bit older and have done something pretty interesting before school. H is 3x the size of S/Y (and therefore probably about 50%-100% more course offerings) and has a much more political tilt. Y is probably going to have the most dreamers and future academics out of the bunch. All of that said, you're going to find that 90% of students at each of these schools is pretty interchangeable and the biggest differences have to do with the programs offered and the cultures of each respective place.

[BruceWayne]

For public interest, S has a slight advantage over H (better LRAP, more involved students, better support services, etc, etc). For clerkships, it's actually pretty even if you look at the most recent couple years for Y and S (which both are in front of H in terms of percent of the class, but obviously lag in absolute numbers). S is the undisputed king of CA for virtually everything--including clerkships, so there's a small boost there, even as compared to Y. The only real difference professionally that I could put my finger on is that your shot of making LR at Y and S is relatively better than at H (same # of people on LR, fewer people to try out), yet the weight of being on YLJ or SLR is virtually the same as HLR.

All of that said, these differences are incredibly minor, and as this post demonstrates, reasonable people can differ on them. Rather than making your decision based on whether you trust my word more or one of the other poster's word more (or whoever you end up talking to in the real world about this), you should go where you feel you "fit" the best. How you do at S or Y or H is going to have a much bigger impact on your career than whether you go to S or Y or H, and each school has its own fairly unique feel. H is probably marginally worse for what you want to do than Y which is probably marginally worse than S, but if H is the perfect fit and you end up with half Hs and President of a student group instead of 1/3 and Secretary, that's going to count for MUCH more than the very slight differences between the schools.

Your experience going to H Y or S will be pretty notably different, and THAT is what you should be primarily thinking about. S has clinics that you do full time (a pretty unique program with significant advantages and disadvantages), and really pushes (and makes it easy to do) dual degrees. S and Y both place a premium on life experience, so the average student is going to be a bit older and have done something pretty interesting before school. H is 3x the size of S/Y (and therefore probably about 50%-100% more course offerings) and has a much more political tilt. Y is probably going to have the most dreamers and future academics out of the bunch. All of that said, you're going to find that 90% of students at each of these schools is pretty interchangeable and the biggest differences have to do with the programs offered and the cultures of each respective place.

Although I agree with most of your post, I just want to point something out about the bolded. From what I understand Yale is the only law school in the nation without a forced curve. In other words "how you do" means something completely different at Yale v. any other law school (H and S included). Basically you can go into Yale with the idea that you will work as hard as you can, and you can expect to have good results. You cannot go into a school with a forced curve with that same level of certainty. Basically your grade comes down to what Joe next to you does on top of what you do. Finally, when you look at the Art III clerkship numbers you realize that Yale is simply monstrous.